On 14 Mar 2013, at 23:43, Stephen P. King wrote:

Dear Bruno,

        This is a nice lecture by Johan van Benthem that covers the kind of
approach that I am trying to use in my critique of comp:
http://videolectures.net/esslli2011_benthem_logic/ It gives a nice
alternative to the concept of a universal Platonic Mind or secular God
to whom all true statements are known to be true.

        It might help you understand my thinking. ;-)

But it does not. Comp needs only arithmetical realism, and oppose itself to stronger form of platonism or realism, even for the physical. So I fail to see your point.

Please make you point explicitly.

But from your last post, I think that your theory is no-comp. But I am not interested in defending the truth of any theory. Just the validity of a reasoning, which shows that comp leads to a body problem. And that's what makes comp interesting, imo, as comp explains that the physical laws have a non physical origin. As a scientist, I don't care about the truth of a theory. I care only on its refutability.

Bruno



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to